Wednesday, May 19, 2010

Hypocrisy and Gay Rights

The following post will be the last one that I make on the subject of gay rights for a few I will be turning my attention towards more thought provoking issues like immigration reform and healthcare reform. But this post is more of a response to the recent developments in Minnesota and Hawaii that I believe highlight some key issues in the gay marriage debate.

What I have noticed over the past few weeks is that this issue is not about "protecting" marriage, and is instead more pure distaste and hatred toward homosexuals. The contradictions and illogicality of those who want "traditional" marriage I will show fails when the actual evidence is looked at.

First, lets discuss Hawaii. A few weeks ago the Hawaii legislature approved a Civil-Unions bill that would give Hawaii same sex couples all the same rights as married couples. The legislature compromised by NOT calling these Unions marriages, because for years those who have fought for one man one woman marriages have said that the "institution" is only allowed for straight people. Fine, said Hawaii's Legislature, we will give all the civil, legal benefits to same-sex couples, those rights that the government currently arbitrarily gives heterosexual married couples, but we will respect your religious views and not say "marriage". Is this acceptable? Not to Hawaii conservatives, who claim that this is just a sneak attempt at gay marriage. Umm...the legislature is allowing you to keep the word that you want and yet allow same sex couples to have equal rights...totally sneak attempting gay marriage. This shows that the rights fight is not truly about the word "marriage" but is instead directly aimed at denying gay and lesbian couples the normal rights that other couples have.

Next example, the recent decision by the Governor of Minnesota to veto a bill giving same sex partners the right to make end of life decisions...basically a form of domestic partnership. The Governor says that this law was needless because partners can already do what the bill stipulates. He says this ignoring the evidence to the contrary...that wills and other non-enshrined in law statutes are often time overruled by other factors such as the deceased family and such. The Governor then states that this bill was just another step toward gay marriage. So because something "might" lead to something it should automatically be outlawed? This is pure discrimination on the part of the Governor.

No comments:

Post a Comment

Related Posts with Thumbnails